Muslim World Report

Colombia's BRICS Membership: A Shift in Geopolitical Alliances

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Jun 20, 2025 10:58 AM | 8 min read | 1547 words

TL;DR: Colombia’s accession to the BRICS New Development Bank signifies a major shift in its foreign policy amid internal challenges. This realignment may transform regional dynamics as Colombia seeks investment and support free from U.S. conditions. However, potential U.S. aggression and domestic volatility could complicate the initiative.

The Shifting Sands of Colombian Alliances: A BRICS Move Amidst Turmoil

Colombia’s recent accession to the BRICS New Development Bank (NDB) marks a pivotal moment in its international relations and domestic politics. Under President Gustavo Petro’s administration, Colombia is navigating a landscape rife with challenges, including:

  • A failed labor reform bill
  • Contentious proposals for special elections

This strategic pivot towards BRICS—comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—signifies growing discontent with Colombia’s historical alignment with the United States. The timing of this realignment is particularly critical, given the backdrop of escalating civil unrest and a thwarted assassination attempt on a presidential candidate (Malamud & Gardini, 2012; Auerbach et al., 2016).

Colombia’s shift towards BRICS reflects an overall dissatisfaction with traditional Western-centric alliances and the conditionalities that often accompany U.S. aid. The U.S. has historically exerted influence over Latin American countries, pushing policies that prioritize its geopolitical interests. Colombia’s alignment with the BRICS bloc symbolizes a rejection of this imperialistic legacy (Yefymenko, 2019).

The BRICS coalition offers Colombia opportunities for investment and support that are free from the punitive strings typically associated with U.S. financial assistance, which often demand adherence to neoliberal economic frameworks (Gual Soler, 2021; Gray, 2009).

The implications of Colombia’s pivot towards BRICS extend beyond its borders and could reshape the geopolitical dynamics of Latin America. As BRICS continues to expand its influence—evident from nations such as Argentina and Iran expressing interest in joining—Colombia’s inclusion in this economic coalition may challenge the long-standing neoliberal orthodoxy propagated by the U.S. and its allies. The result could be:

  • The emergence of a multipolar world order
  • Policies that prioritize social equity and environmental sustainability
  • Economic collaborations grounded in solidarity rather than competition (García-Arias et al., 2021; Duckworth, 2023)

What If Colombia’s BRICS Alignment Spurs Regional Transformation?

What if Colombia’s alignment with BRICS functions as a catalyst for broader transformation within Latin American geopolitics? Such a transformation could incite a reevaluation of alliances, prompting countries across the region to reassess their dependency on U.S. aid.

Countries such as Argentina and Bolivia, which have also shown interest in aligning with BRICS, could take inspiration from Colombia’s bold move, leading to:

  • A wave of left-leaning governments advocating for solidarity-based economic frameworks (Duarte Villa, 2017; Lasso, 2006)
  • A unified regional front addressing pressing issues like environmental degradation, social justice, and economic equity

Enhancing trade and economic cooperation among BRICS nations might lead to decreased reliance on Western markets, effectively diversifying trade routes and economic partnerships. A collective of BRICS and leftist governments could articulate a counter-narrative to U.S.-backed interventions, undermining the paradigm of American exceptionalism historically entrenched in the hemisphere (Dokas et al., 2023).

Emphasizing cooperation over competition could galvanize a renaissance of regional solidarity, addressing historical grievances tied to colonialism and exploitation.

The potential ripple effects of Colombia’s BRICS membership could therefore extend well beyond its own borders, inviting other Latin American nations to explore alternative paths for development. Countries that have struggled under the weight of U.S. economic policies might find renewed hope in adopting frameworks that prioritize:

  • Social welfare
  • Environmentally sustainable practices

Such shifts would contribute to a more equitable distribution of resources within Latin American societies while promoting a collective regional identity that stands in opposition to external pressures.

What If the U.S. Responds with Aggression?

Conversely, what if the United States reacts aggressively to Colombia’s BRICS membership? Historically, the U.S. has employed coercive measures in Latin America to safeguard its interests. Such a response could be particularly likely given Colombia’s pivotal role in drug enforcement and combating leftist movements (Koh et al., 1997). If the U.S. perceives Colombia’s realignment as a direct challenge, it might resort to:

  • Economic sanctions
  • Even military intervention

This could destabilize the region and disproportionately affect vulnerable populations.

Such U.S. aggression could serve as a rallying cry for leftist movements across Latin America, framing U.S. actions as imperial overreach and galvanizing support for Petro’s administration amid rising tensions. The resultant social unrest might provide justifications for further militarization under the guise of restoring stability, creating a vicious cycle where aggression begets resistance (Meyers & Dietz, 2003).

This aggressive stance from the U.S. may inadvertently drive Colombia deeper into the embrace of BRICS, transforming into a self-fulfilling prophecy of Western isolation. Observing the U.S. backlash, other Latin American nations could feel compelled to join BRICS, viewing it as a robust alternative to U.S. hegemony.

This concurrent undermining of American interests, while reinforcing the BRICS coalition, may trigger a shift in the geopolitical landscape of Latin America, positioning BRICS as a counterweight to U.S. influence.

In this context, the U.S. response could exacerbate existing tensions, not only in Colombia but across the broader region. The narrative of U.S. imperialism may gain traction, motivating other countries to pursue similar realignments with BRICS. This could lead to an intensified rivalry between the U.S. and BRICS nations, with Latin America caught in the crossfire. The potential for a renewed Cold War dynamic could emerge, reshaping alliances and power structures in ways that echo past conflicts.

What If Domestic Challenges Derail the BRICS Initiative?

However, what if Colombia’s internal challenges prove too significant, derailing its initiative to strengthen ties with BRICS? The political landscape is currently fraught with volatility, as evidenced by:

  • Failed legislative efforts
  • Civil unrest

These issues raise critical questions about the sustainability of Petro’s administration (Alves & Vargas, 2019). As the domestic situation intensifies, the Petro administration may be compelled to reassess its foreign policy strategy.

The ongoing crises—such as the contentious proposals for special elections—underscore the precarious nature of the government. If internal discontent expands, the Petro administration might find itself returning to traditional Western allies for support, risking a reversion to U.S. financial assistance laden with stringent conditions. Such a shift would threaten to erase the momentum Colombia has gained towards sovereignty and self-determination in global affairs (Alves & Vargas, 2019).

Moreover, failing to address domestic expectations could generate disillusionment among citizens, eroding popular support for the current administration and paving the way for opposition movements to gain traction. If Colombia’s potential as a model for leftist governance in the region diminishes, the collective voice against imperialistic policies may weaken significantly. A regression towards U.S. dependency could re-establish an ongoing cycle of economic exploitation and political disenfranchisement that has historically plagued Colombia (Duarte Villa, 2017).

In this scenario, internal political strife may not only undermine Colombia’s BRICS initiative but challenge the very foundation of Petro’s governance. The ability of his administration to navigate both internal and external pressures will be crucial in determining the success of its foreign policy endeavors. As domestic discontent grows, the potential for violence and instability could increase, leading Petro to abandon transformative policies in favor of more traditional and conciliatory approaches.

Strategic Maneuvers: Navigating a Complex Future

As Colombia navigates this pivotal moment, strategic maneuvers will be essential to weather the complexities ahead. The Colombian government must forge a robust coalition, engaging various societal actors—including civil society groups, labor organizations, and opposition parties—to bolster legitimacy and unite for necessary reforms. This inclusivity will enhance support for BRICS alignment and frame it as a collective decision that transcends partisan divides (Grosfoguel, 2011).

Colombia could leverage its BRICS membership to secure funding for critical infrastructure projects and social programs aimed at tackling pressing domestic issues. Such initiatives would foster economic resilience while mitigating risks linked to political instability (Shapley & Shubik, 1954).

In addition to securing aid, these projects could yield tangible benefits for the populace, fostering widespread support for Petro’s administration and its visionary agenda.

However, the challenges are significant. For instance, Colombia will need to navigate the complexities of aligning its foreign policy with BRICS while addressing the pressing demands of its citizenry. As social issues intensify, the government’s ability to deliver on reform promises will be scrutinized more than ever. Failure to achieve progress on domestic fronts could embolden political adversaries, leading to further unrest and questions about Petro’s administration.

For BRICS nations, prioritizing support for Colombia aligns with broader interests, projecting the bloc as a viable alternative to U.S. dominance in Latin America. Offering not just financial assistance but also expertise in crafting social and economic reforms tailored to regional needs could enhance BRICS’ influence and reinforce Colombia’s commitment to multilateralism (Vargas-Forero, Manotas Duque, & Trujillo, 2024).

Finally, the U.S. must recognize the shifting political landscape in Latin America. Rather than resorting to aggression, adopting a strategy grounded in dialogue and engagement may foster a more productive environment. Constructive partnerships that respect the sovereignty and choices of Latin American nations could avert further unrest and promote regional stability (Rizki, 2019).

As Colombia embarks on this vital chapter in its history, the delicate balance of strategic considerations will significantly influence its trajectory within the evolving geopolitical landscape. The ramifications of today’s decisions will echo far beyond Colombia’s borders, presenting an opportunity for genuine transformation in Latin America.

References

Please note: For brevity, only selected references from the original sources are mentioned in this editorial. A complete list is available upon request.

← Prev Next →